-
PAKISTAN BUSINESS REVIEW JAN 2016
Research
805
The Indian Wahabi Movement (1826-1871) . . .Research
THE INDIAN WAHABI MOVEMENT(1826-1871): APPROACHES TO
ITS STUDY AND ANALYSIS
So far this movement, has been studied, analysed andinterpreted
primarily from two viewpoints, the narrower and thebroader: any
research work with its focus on the narrower perspectivenaturally
possesses the merits and demerits of a micro study, butobviously
deprives it of all the corresponding advantages anddisadvantages
attributed to a macro level analysis, and vice versa.Besides the
above two perspectives, the colonials, nationalists,political
economists, radical historians, post-British era state-oriented
writers, ‘subaltern’ historiographers, post-colonialnarrators,
post-1947 Pakistani ideologues and Marxist scholars’narratives
differ from each other, substantially, since they anlayseand
interpret the same historical events and political movements
fromwidely different perspectives.
Keywords: Colonial, Community/Communitarian, Empire, the
GreatGame, Subaltern.
JEL Classification: Z000
Abstract
Sahib Khan Channa1
1-Dept of CAPS, Institute of Business Management, IoBM, Karachi,
Pakistan
-
PAKISTAN BUSINESS REVIEW JAN 2016
Research
806
The Indian Wahabi Movement (1826-1871) . . .
This subject, like any else one, can appropriately be
understoodmainly from two perspectives, the narrower and the
broader.
The Indian Subcontinent shows many variations. It has
fertileriver valleys, high plateaus, populous plains, waterless
deserts andimpenetrable jungles. These differences in land
formations helped todevelop variations in the attitudes, customs,
and life styles of itsinhabitants. Each of its many regions is a
fascinating ‘world’ by itself,distinguished by one or more unique
characteristics.
Two of these zones are the focal points of this movement:
thehigh plateaus in the northwest, and the middle Ganges Valley
withChota Nagpur plateau in the northeast. The former comprises
thetribal areas1 of northwestern Pakistan (or southeastern
Afghanistan),and the latter the State of Bihar in the Indian
Union.²
The distinguishing characteristics of the first of the above
twozones are tribal fealty, warmongering, and a keen predilection
foracquisitions and booty. Distinguishing features of the second
zoneare a disposition to rebel against the established order, a
nonconformistattitude towards prevailing system, a knack for
organisation, and apenchant for cabal and secrecy. Religious
extremism and extremistmindset are common to both. The respective
peculiarities of the twozones have had full play throughout
history.
Among the conquering hordes that have poured down throughthe
openings in the northwest plateaus to overwhelm and plunder
theSubcontinent one after the other since times immemorial were
theAryans,³ Scythians or the Saka-Massagetai tribes’
confederacy,Greeks, Parthians, Kushans or Kushana-Tukharian tribes’
confederacy,Hunas or Chionite-Ephthalite (including Gujar) tribes’
confederacy,Turko-Afghan Ghaznavids, Ghorids, Moghuls, Abdalis
(originallyEphthalites) renamed Durranis (pearls), and countless
others includingthe unsuccessful Mongol incursions in the 13th and
14th centuries CEand the successful raids of Tamerlane, the Mongol
ruler of Samarkand
-
PAKISTAN BUSINESS REVIEW JAN 2016
Research
807
The Indian Wahabi Movement (1826-1871) . . .
(r. 1369-1404) and Nadir Shah (scourge of central Asia and
India), abandit chief turned the ruler of Persia (r. 1736-47), the
former in 1398-99 and the latter in 1739. “Although it was the Sikh
power” (1799-1849), notes Sir Olaf Caroe, “which brought to an end
long centuriesof invasion from the north-west, it was left to
others to build wherethey had ravaged, and for their ultimate
successors to found a Muslimstate, not based on war or feudalism
but on new ways that had beenlearned in the century which succeeded
to the Sikhashahi.”4 (Caroe,p. 316.)
Bihar consists of three regions, whose history could be tracedto
at least 6th century BCE. First of these, Videha (or Mithila,
Tirhut),was a favourite haunt of Mahavir (c. 6th-5th century BCE),5
who wasborn just north of present-day Patna, at Kundargama, which
laterbecame a centre of Jainism. Second was Vaishali, near
present-dayBasarah, which was capital of a large ‘republican’ state
of the Lichchavior Lachhvi tribe or clan.6 Third was Magadha,
originally the seat ofthe Magadha tribe, which rose to unquestioned
prominence in the 4th
century BCE as one of the earliest organised states in
theSubcontinent, its renowned ancient kings Bimbisara (r. c.
544-493BCE) and his successor and son Ajatasatru (r. c. 493-468
BCE) werepatrons of both Mahavir and Buddha (6th-5th century BCE),7
and closeto a millennium the history of Magadha was the history of
Hindustan(northern India). Three Hindi/Urdu dialects – Bhojpuri,
Maithali, andMagadhi – developed from the Prakrit, which was spoken
at the timesof late Guptas, also indicate these three ancient
cultural and linguisticregions of Bihar. ‘Bihar’, a variation of
‘Vihar’, came to be known asname of a region, in the 12th or 13th
century of the Common Era, duringthe invasions of Turko-Afghan
conquerors, who, struck by theprofusion of flourishing Buddhist
Vihars (monasteries) in this middleGanges region, began to formally
call it by that name.8 In somecolloquial dialects spoken in and
around Bihar, the Hindi/Urdu letter‘vao’ (= ‘v’ or ‘w’ in English)
is changed to ‘bae’ (= ‘b’) or vice versaas in the case of Vande
Mataram, Vajpayee, and Vanjara which areoften changed into Bande
Mataram, Bajpayee, and Banjara
-
PAKISTAN BUSINESS REVIEW JAN 2016
Research
808
The Indian Wahabi Movement (1826-1871) . . .
respectively. The same appears to have been the reason for
change of‘Vihar’ to ‘Bihar’.
The period from c. 800 to 200 BCE, was termed the ‘Axial Age’
bythe German existentialist theologian, Karl Jaspers (1883-1969),
becauseit proved to be pivotal in the spiritual development of
humanity.9 Itmarks the beginning of religion as we know it. New
religions andphilosophical systems emerged. Although the debate
over their exactrespective period(s) is still inconclusive, it was
most probably thisage that saw the emergence of Zoroasterianism in
Iran, Confucianismand Taoism in China, Jainism and Buddhism as well
as the beginningof the religion that we now call Hinduism (as a
result of the compositionof Upanisads, also called Vedanta) in
India, monotheism in the MiddleEast, and Greek ‘rationalism’ in
Europe. These axial traditions wereassociated with such men as the
great Hebrew prophets of the eighth,seventh and sixth centuries
BCE; with Zoroaster (c. sixth centuryBCE) in Persia; with the sages
of the Upanisads (the genre of textswhich end or complete the Vedic
body of literature), and VardhamanaMahavir (540-468 BCE), and the
Gautama Buddha (c. 563-483 BCE) inIndia; with Confucius (551-479
BCE), Laotzu or Lao-tse (an oldercontemporary of Confucius; some
contend he never existed, and thebook ascribed to him is an
anthology compiled by various authors),and the author of the Dao De
Jung (or Tao Te Ching, the most famousand influential Taoist text,
traditionally attributed to Laotzu) in China;and with the
fifth-century tragedians, and the distingusished trio ofancient
philosophers – Socrates (c. 469-399 BCE), Plato (c. 427-347BCE) and
Aristotle (c. 384-322 BCE) – in Greece.
The Indian movement of nonconformism and resistance
toestablished order were especially active in the
northeastern/midnorthern Ganges Valley now known as Bihar.10 The
zone or asizeable portion of its territories, apart from being the
site of theLachhvi tribe’s ‘republican’ state (6th century BCE),
came under thesway of such great dynasties as the Saisunagas (c.
642-362 BCE),11
the Nandas (c. 362-321 BCE), the Mauryas (c. 321-180 BCE), the
Guptas
-
PAKISTAN BUSINESS REVIEW JAN 2016
Research
809
The Indian Wahabi Movement (1826-1871) . . .
(c. 320-547 CE), the Palas of eastern India or Bengal (c.
750-1185 CE),the Sultanate of Delhi (1206-1526 CE), and the Moghuls
(1526-1764CE).12 It came under the British rule after the battle of
Baxer or Buxer in1764 and remained so up to 15th August 1947, when
it became part ofthe Indian Union. Its present-day capital, Patna,
has been incontinuous existence for more than 27 centuries and
figuredprominently in Indian history from time to time under
different names(Mansingh, pp. 71, 239, 276, 316-17, 319-20), e.g.,
Girivraja (Garhi +Raja), Rajagriha (Raja + Grah, now known as
Rajgir), Pataliputra(Paataali + Putra), Kusumapura, Nalanda, Patna,
and Azimabad(renamed by prince Azim, favourite grandson of
Aurangzeb, when hewas subahdar there). The commercial and strategic
importance ofPatna site, at the confluence of the rivers Ganges and
Sona, wasacknowledged by the Pala rulers of eastern India in the
8th centuryCE. They restored the city when it was still known as
Pataliputra andmade endowment to its great Buddhist University
(Vihar) of Nalanda.Sher Shah Suri also gave due importance to it
during his six-year rulefrom 1539-1545 CE. The city was captured by
Akbar the Great in 1574when he personally commanded a campaign to
takeover wealthy middleand lower Gangetic Valley. He made Bihar a
subah or a major provinceof his empire in 1582. Henceforth, Patna
became the administrativeseat of the Moghul subahdar or subedar
(governor) of the provinceand grew up as a commercial, educational
and political centre. Thepopulation of the city was estimated at
200,000 in mid-17th century.(Mansingh, p. 320.) It continued to
thrive during the twilight ofMoghuls but was eclipsed by Calcutta
(present-day Kolkata) whenBihar was merged into Bengal province by
the British in mid-1760s.The annulment of the merger in 1912
restored Patna to its previousposition as a metropolis.
The above referred to second zone, particularly its chief
cityPatna, according to the narrower view, resurged into making the
firstzone, the northwest frontier of the Subcontinent, a flash
point firstagainst the Sikh and then against the British rulers for
about half acentury (1826-1871 CE).13
-
PAKISTAN BUSINESS REVIEW JAN 2016
Research
810
The Indian Wahabi Movement (1826-1871) . . .
The broader view provides another perspective. It shows thatthe
first zone had already been a flash point as a vital part of
thecentury-long (1807-1907) geopolitical ‘Great Game’14 played
mainlyby the Tsarist Russian Empire and the British Empire, in
which activistsof the so-called Indian Wahabi Movement acted as
‘the unconscioustools of history’. “The vast chessboard on which
this shadowystruggle for political ascendancy took place started
from the Caucasusin the west, . . . to Chinese Turkestan and Tibet
in the east.” (Hopkirk,p. 2.) The ultimate prize was British India
– ‘the greatest of all imperialprizes’. The term used by some
Russian scholars for ‘Great Game’ isBolshaya Igra. (Ibid., p.
7.)
It all began in the early years of the 19th century, when
Russiantroops started to fight their way southwards through the
Caucasustowards northern Persia. (Ibid., p. 2.) At first this did
not seem to posea serious threat to British interests, but the
situation was drasticallychanged after the ill-fated invasion of
Russia by Napoleon Bonaparte(r. 1804-1814) in which he was driven
back by the Russians with terriblelosses.15 This success made the
Russians, brim with self-confidenceand ambition, pose a serious
threat, which did not go away till 1907.Long before this, the
Russian Tsars who did cast covetous eyes onIndia include Peter I or
Peter the Great (r. 1682-1725), Catherine II orCatherine the Great
(r. 1762-1796), and her son and successor Paul I (r.1796-1801).
(Ibid., pp. 2, 15, 20-21.) Joint invasion of India by Russiaand
France was also offered by Paul I to Napoleon and by the latter
toPaul’s son and successor Alexander I (r. 1801-1825), but it fell
throughon both occasions for want of serious interest on both
sides. (Ibid.,pp. 2-3, 26-28.)
Whatever historians may say with hindsight today, the
Russianthreat to India seemed real enough at that time.16(Ibid., p.
5.) TheRussian Empire had been steadily expanding at the rate of
some 55square miles a day, or 20,000 square miles a year. At the
beginning ofthe 19th century, more than 2,000 miles separated the
Russian and
-
PAKISTAN BUSINESS REVIEW JAN 2016
Research
811
The Indian Wahabi Movement (1826-1871) . . .
British realms in Asia. By the end of the century, the distance
hadshrunk to a few hundred miles and in parts of the Pamir region
to lessthan twenty miles.17 (Ibid.) During his first 16 years on
the Russianthrone (1801-1817), Alexander I added 200,000 square
miles to hisempire together with 13 million new subjects, and
increased his armyfrom “only 80,000 strong . . . to 640,000, not
including second-linetroops, militia, Tartar cavalry, and so
on.”(Ibid., p. 61, quoting GeneralSir Robert Wilson.) He was
succeeded by his brother Nicholas I (r.1825-1855), who embarked on
the second Russo-Turkish War (1828-1829). Treaty of Adrianople
(1829) ended the war giving Russiasubstantial territorial gains in
Asia Minor including control overnortheastern Armenia. The reigns
of two succeeding Tsars, AlexanderII (r. 1855-1881) and Alexander
III (r. 1881-1894), saw the fulfilment ofthe long standing desire
of the Tsars to conquer and annex all CentralAsian Muslim
countries/khanates – Kazan, Astrakhan, the Crimea,Tashkent,
Samarkand and present-day Uzbekistan comprising thekhanates of
Bokhara, Khiva and Kokand, the last named to fall last in1876 –
that lay between the Russian Empire and Persia andAfghanistan. To
be brief, all the three countries bordering Afghanistanon its
northern side, namely, present-day Tajikistan was conquered in1868,
present-day Turkmenistan in 1869 and present-day Uzbekistanwas
repeatedly attacked from 1717 until its last khanate of
Kokand’sannexation in 1876. The last Russian emperor Tsar Nicholas
II (r.1894-1917), who succeeded Alexander III, found neither time
norexpediency to conquer Afghanistan and/or come into
armedconfrontation with the British Indian Empire. In fact, Russian
weaknessafter its humiliating defeat by Japan in 1904-05 and the
RussianRevolution of 1905, the forerunner of the later successful
BolshevikRevolution of 1917 which ended for ever the Tsarist rule
in Russia,eventually forced him to sign an agreement with the
Britain in 1907,which finally brought an end to the Anglo-Russian
rivalry and the‘Great Game’.18
The British conquest of the Indian Subcontinent from Bengal
inthe east, during the 18th century, to Sindh, the Punjab and its
the then
-
PAKISTAN BUSINESS REVIEW JAN 2016
Research
812
The Indian Wahabi Movement (1826-1871) . . .
northwest frontier region, and the Northern Areas (consisting of
whatwas later known as the Gilgit Agency, with its dependencies of
Hunza,Nagar and the principalities of Swat and Chitral at the
northern end ofthe famous Durand Line) in the west, northwest and
north, during the19th century (the former two in 1843 and 1849
respectively and thelatter in 1890s), matched the Russian advance
in the south and eastCentral Asia from their heartlands to warm
waters of the Indian Ocean.Each of them raised the bogey of the
other’s expansion to press onfurther and further till they stopped
on either side of Afghanistan,which by the beginning of the 20th
century became the buffer betweenthe two empires. (Sarila,
p.17.)
Alarmed at the imminent Russian influence in Afghanistan,
Britainfought a costly war in Afghanistan,19 known as the First
Anglo-AfghanWar (1838-1842), to replace the then Afghan ruler Dost
MuhammadKhan (r. 1826-1839, 1843-1863) with pro-British chieftain
Shah Shujaal-Mulk (r. 1803-1809, 1839-1842). The replacement,
however, did notlast long, for the ousted Amir regained his throne
four years later(1843) by getting his claim to it recognised by the
British. It was hewho established for the first time the
territorial outlines of present-day Afghanistan by his control of
Kandhar (1855), northernAfghanistan (1850-59) and Herat (1863).
(Isaacs et al. eds., p.181.)Friendly relations between him and the
British continued till his sonand successor, Sher Ali’s
(r.1863-1865,1869-1878) refusal (1878) toadmit a British Resident,
which resulted in the launch of the SecondAnglo-Afghan War
(1878-1881) by the British in November 1878. SherAli died in
February 1879, and three months later his son Yakub Khansigned the
Treaty of Gandamak with the British by which he wasrecognised as
Amir in exchange for British control over his foreignpolicy and
stationing of a British Resident at Kabul, besides, cedingnot only
the Khyber and Kurram but also Sibi, Pishin, Loralai and thePathan
territories north and east of Quetta, needed by the British toround
off the new province of Balochistan.
In the aftermath of the two Anglo-Afghan wars, the British
-
PAKISTAN BUSINESS REVIEW JAN 2016
Research
813
The Indian Wahabi Movement (1826-1871) . . .
wrested Sindh from Talpur Mirs in 1843 and the Punjab,along with
present-day Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Province, fromthe Sikhs in 1849;
in 1847, handed over, of course, under their paramountcy,Kashmir
and the adjacent northern hill-territories to GulabSingh, the chief
of Jamu, the founder of Kashmir’s Dogradynasty, who was later on
helped by the British to extendhis rule into Kashmir right up to
the Sinkiang border; (Caroe,pp. 310, 323; and Sarila, p.16.)
annexed a number of Indian princely states, under the‘Doctrine
of Lapse’, adopted by the then Governor GeneralLord Dalhousie
(1848-1856), like Satara in 1848, Baghat,Jaitpur and Sambalpur in
1850, Udaipur in 1852, Jhansi in1853, Nagpur in 1854, and Karauli
in 1855, while the chargeof mismanagement was used to force Nizam
of HyderabadDeccan to cede required territory and to seize
absolutely therich lands of the ever loyal Nawab of Awadh in
1856;(Mansingh, p.115.)
suppressed ruthlessly the Great Indian Mutiny or Revolt of1857,
now called the War of Independence, resulting toheighten “British
fears of rebellion, conspiracies, whole warsand possible foreign
provocations” (among the likely foreignculprits in the 1860s there
being but a single importantsuspect, the Russian Empire);20 (Meyer
and Brysac, quotedin Sarila, p.16.)
transferred control of the Indian Empire from the East
IndiaCompany directly to the British Crown in 1858 and vestedthe
Company’s powers in the Secretary of State for India atLondon;
-
PAKISTAN BUSINESS REVIEW JAN 2016
Research
814
The Indian Wahabi Movement (1826-1871) . . .
initiated for the first time, significant constitutional
reformsunder the Government of India Act, 1861 (with
secondinstalment in 1891);
established the official summer capital of the Government
ofIndia (from 1864 to 1947) at Simla (in the Punjab), a hill-townin
the Himalayan foothills, where, later on, the headquartersof the
newly formed Indian Intelligence Department werealso located, as
the town “was a good deal closer to theareas of Russian activity
than Calcutta”; (Hopkirk, p. 422;and Mansingh, p. 384.)
crushed effectively the Indian Wahabi Movement,21 withina decade
and a half of the crushing of the Great Indian Mutinyand a decade
of the introduction of the constitutionalreforms, with the help of
effective military expeditions in1858, 1863, and 1868 followed by
severe convictions of the‘traitors’ through court proceedings like
the Ambala Trial of1864, Patna Trial of 1865, Maldah Trial of
September 1870,Rajmahal Trial of October 1870, and ‘the great’
trial of 1871;22
dissolved the East India Company in 1873, and proclaimedBritish
Queen Victoria (r. 1837-1901) as the Empress of Indiain 1876;
secured Quetta from the Khan of Kalat under the treaty
ofJacobabad (1876), which in fact was the extension of thetreaty of
1854, to make it a military base, and transferred theoverall
supervision and control of Balochistan from the Sindhauthorities to
a separate Balochistan Agency, formallyconstituted in February
1877, under the Agent to theGovernor General of India, with
headquarters at Quetta;(Channa, pp.139-44.)
-
PAKISTAN BUSINESS REVIEW JAN 2016
Research
815
The Indian Wahabi Movement (1826-1871) . . .
completed railway line between Sindh and the Punjab in1879,
which was subsequently extended up to Peshawar in1881 (later on,
Attock bridge was also built);
treated the northwest frontier of India as the most sensitiveof
all frontiers of their vast Indian empire; it was here thatthe pick
of the British Indian army was quartered (where,incidentally,
Winston Churchill, who later became the BritishPrime Minister from
1940-1945 and 1951-1955, served withthe Malakand Field Force in
1898), and for the army’sconvenience, subsequently, built a railway
network to theBolan Pass, like the earlier one to the Khyber Pass,
bothleading to Afghanistan;
constructed a road from Gilgit in Hunza (in the then
northernKashmir) through the 13,000-feet-high Mintaka Pass in
theKarakoram mountains to Kashgar in Sinkiang, and postedagents
there to monitor activities across the border inpresent- day
Uzbekistan and the Pamirs; (Sarila, p. 16.) andfinally
began to replace the practice of dealing with the tribal
tractsand conducting the relations with the tribesmen throughthe
deputy commissioners of the six ‘settled districts’ ofPeshawar,
Bannu, Kohat, Hazara, Dera Ismail Khan and DeraGhazi Khan with the
system of establishing political agenciesfor the western border
tracts.23 (Channa, p. 45.) (Later on, aseparate province, the
North-West Frontier Province, wasestablished in November 1901, that
is, nearly six years beforethe formal end of the Anglo-Russian
rivalry in 1907.)
Any research work with its focus wholly on the
narrowerperspective possesses all the merits and demerits of a
micro levelstudy of any subject, and by completely ignoring the
broaderperspective deprives it of or saves it from all the
corresponding
-
PAKISTAN BUSINESS REVIEW JAN 2016
Research
816
The Indian Wahabi Movement (1826-1871) . . .
advantages and disadvantages attributed to a macro level
analysisof any issue. And that is the case with most of the
researches so fardone on the subject.
However, besides the above two important perspectives,“differing
historical perspectives have [also] scrutinized the latenineteenth
century non-western and South Asian contact withEuropean
imperialism and the British empire. The nature of
indigenousresistance to foreign domination has been continuously
analysed.Colonial narratives dismissed various suppressed uprisings
as thetriumph of order over anarchy. Nationalist chronologies, on
the otherhand, appropriated disparate revolts as events
anticipating the daythe people would come into their own. Political
economists and radicalhistorians traced conflict to changing
structures of class, caste andeconomy. Post-independence, state
oriented scholars wrotemodernizing teleologies in which resistance
developed asconsolidating governments confronted and absorbed
traditionalsocieties and cultures. More recently, ‘subaltern’ [or
nationalresistance to imperial authority] and post-colonial
narratives interpretedcolonial era unrest as continuing conflict
between domineering westernknowledge-power and communitarian
consciousness and agency.”(Nichols, p. 221.)
In Pakistan, post-1947 historical scholarship on anti-colonial
politicsand resistance strives to analyse the ‘emerging
nationalism, especiallyin relation to Islamic identities’.
Lastly, one of the most significant modern approaches is
thescientific perspective of historical materialism, or
materialistinterpretation of history, generally adopted by the
Marxist scholars/historians, who interpret this movement, along
with such othermovements, launched against the British, in the
nineteenth century, ––– like Faraizi movement (1830-1857), 24
Parganas (1831-1832), TharSindh (1846), Santal Pargana (1855),
Nagarparkar Sindh (1859), Indigodistricts (1859-1861), Tuskhali
(1872-1875), Pabna (1873), Chhagalnaiya
-
PAKISTAN BUSINESS REVIEW JAN 2016
Research
817
The Indian Wahabi Movement (1826-1871) . . .
(1874), Mymensing (1874), Munshiganj (1880-1881), and Sindhi
Hursor Sanghar (1896-1900) ––– as peasants revolts often fought
underthe guise of religion and/or patriotism.
Notes
1. According to Sir Olaf Caroe, “The continued politicalfreedom
of the tribal belt is mainly owing to the love of liberty of
thetribesman, his readiness to defend it, and his capacity as a
fighter onhis own ground.” (Caroe, p. 321.)2. Agriculture is the
main source of employment in Bihar, whichpresently accounts for
about 40% of India’s mineral production andhosts industries based
on minerals, steel and heavy engineering.Despite this, Bihar falls
below the national average in terms of literacyrates and other
indices of socio-economic development. (Mansingh,pp. 69-70.)3.
Because of their link to the horse, these tribal peoples
(proto-Indo-Aryans) are said to have come from the steppe land
locatedsomewhere in Central Asia and settled in Iran and India
(possiblybeginning as early as 3500 BCE). This view is opposed by
others,including Indian scholars, who argue that there is no solid
evidenceto suggest the Indo-Aryans came from outside and that the
astronomy,and the associated mathematics, show that the Indo-Aryans
wereindigenous to northwest India. This debate is still
inconclusive, thereare number of intellectual flaws in both the
viewpoints. (Watson, pp.139-40; also, Benedict, p. 38.)4. But soon
the Sikhs had “to arrive at the conviction that theBritish
Government were intriguing with an enemy [Afghans] theyhad once
defeated to encircle and to weaken them. By every processof
reasoning they believed themselves threatened, and they resortedto
war. . . . In a very real sense it led to the Sikh Wars.” (Caroe,
p. 323.)According to Peter Hopkirk, Afghanistan and the Punjab,
“twocountries were [are] to serve as a protecting shield for
[former] BritishIndia.” (Hopkirk, p. 190.)
-
PAKISTAN BUSINESS REVIEW JAN 2016
Research
818
The Indian Wahabi Movement (1826-1871) . . .
5. Mahavir, a scion of the Jnatrika from father’s side
andLichchavi from mother’s side, died at Pava in the present-day
Patnadistrict. Modern scholarship suggests his period from 549 to
477 BCE.(Bowker ed., p. 352.)6. The Lichchavis governed through an
assembly of dignitariesof tribe or clan with an elected chief
(nayaka) from among themselvesfor several hundred years. This
‘republican’ (in fact, a variant ofaristocratic or oligarchic) form
contrasted with that of hereditarykingship adopted by many
neighbouring peoples around 6th centuryBCE. (Mansingh, p. 230.) The
Lichchavis played a prominent part inIndian legend and history for
more than a thousand years. There aregood reasons to believe that
they were of the Scythian or Saka origin.The Malla tribesmen of
Pava Kusinagara were also akin to Lichchavis.Similarly, Mahavir was
also of Scythian or Saka origin. “It seems tome,” says Vincent A.
Smith, “that the Saisunagas, Lichchavis, andseveral other ruling
families or clans in or near Magadha were notIndo-Aryan by blood.”
(Smith, p. 75.)7. Gautama Buddha was son of a Sakya or Saka
(Scythian)chieftain of Kapilavastu, a dependency of Kosala (ancient
name of aregion/state in the central-eastern Ganges subsequently
known asAwadh or Oudh), in what is now Nepal’s Terai area, a
southern sub-montane belt which merges with the Indian Terai, now
forming part ofthe Basti district of Uttar Pradesh and of the
adjacent state of Bihar.(Mansingh, pp. 80, 289.)8. In fact, this
region was known as Bihar before the end of 12th
century of the Common Era: “The Muslim general [MuhammadBakhtyar
Khilji] acting independently, after completing severalsuccessful
plundering expeditions, seized the fort of Bihar in 1193, byan
audacious move, and thus mastered the capital of the Province
ofthat name. . . . he was informed that the whole city and fortress
wereconsidered to be a college, which the name Bihar [Vihar]
signifies.”(Smith, p. 235.)9. Karl Jaspers characterised this
relatively short period as atime when “we meet with the most deep
cut dividing line in history.Man, as we know him today, came into
being… The most extraordinary
-
PAKISTAN BUSINESS REVIEW JAN 2016
Research
819
The Indian Wahabi Movement (1826-1871) . . .
events are concentrated in this period. Confucius and Lao-tse
wereliving in China, all the schools of Chinese philosophy came
into being,including those of Mo-Ti, Chuang-tse, Leh-tsu and a host
of others;India produced Upanishads and Buddha and, like China, ran
the gamutof philosophical possibilities down to scepticism, to
materialism,sophism and nihilism; in Iran Zarathustra taught a
challenging viewof the world as a struggle between good and evil;
in Palestine theprophets made their appearance, from Elijah, by way
of Isaiah andJeremiah to Deutero-Isaiah; Greece witnessed the
appearance ofHomer, of the philosophers – Parmenides, Heraclitus
and Plato – ofthe tragedians, Thucydides and Archimedes. Everything
implied bythese names developed during these few centuries
almostsimultaneously in China, India, and the West, with out any
one ofthese regions knowing of the others.” (Jaspers, p. 2.) During
theperiod, approximately from 750 to 350 BCE, the world underwent
agreat intellectual sea-change, and most of the world’s great
faithscame into being. However, “Not all the faiths created were,
strictlyspeaking, monotheisms, but they did all centre around one
individual,whether that man (always a man) was a god, or the person
throughwhom god spoke, or else someone who had a particular vision
orapproach to life which appealed to vast numbers of people.”
(Watson,p. 145.) .10. The Indian nonconformist movement was
especially activein Magadha and the neighbouring regions where the
Hinduising ofthe population was yet incomplete and distinctions of
race were clearlymarked. The racial distinction between the
Brahmans and rest of thepopulation necessarily evoked and
encouraged the growth ofindependent views on philosophy and
religion. The enlightened menof the upper classes rebelled against
the Brahmans’ claim to theexclusive possession of the knowledge and
key to the door tosalvation. Consequently, a number of sects and
schools of thoughtemerged and flourished, holding very diverse
viewpoints on variousimportant issues. However, in due course of
time, almost all of themdied out except the Jainism and Buddhism.
Both, as historical religions,originated in or around Magadha
kingdom. Both did not come into
-
PAKISTAN BUSINESS REVIEW JAN 2016
Research
820
The Indian Wahabi Movement (1826-1871) . . .
existence independently; in fact, their doctrines were based on
theteachings of earlier oracles. Mahavir commenced his religious
life as atwenty-fourth reformer or tirthankara of an ancient
ascetic orderpreviously propagated by Parsva or Parsvanath, the
twenty-thirdtirthankara, two and a half centuries earlier. Gautama
Buddha’spreaching was related to the ancient cult of the ‘former
Buddhas’,whose clairvoyant at that time was Devadatta, Gautama’s
cousin. Thus,the nonconformist tendency and resistance to the
establilshed(dominant) practice was an age-old tradition in and
around Magadharegion, much prior to Mahavir and Gautama Buddha.11.
The Saisunaga dynasty of Magadha kingdom wasestablished by Sisunaga
(or Shishu + Naga), originally a chieftain ofKasi (present-day
Benares), in or around 642 BCE. His capital, locatedin the hills of
present-day Gaya district, was known as Girivraja (Garhi+ Raja),
also known as old Rajagriha (Raja + Garh). Being situated atthe
confluence of the rivers Ganges and Sona, it was mythical place
ofpilgrimage since time immemorial, like that of Prayag (now known
asAllahabad) at the sangum of rivers Ganges and Yamuna.12.
In-between the rebel Sher Khan, better known as Sher ShahSuri (r.
1539-1545), a jagirdar in Jaunpur (Bihar), not only consolidatedhis
power in Bihar but also defeated and drove out of India Humayun,son
of Babur (r. 1526-1530), the founder of the Moghul empire in
India.Thus, Sher Shah re-established Afghan power in India by
declaringhimself as the emperor of India. He was succeeded by his
son JalalKhan, better known as Islam Shah and/or Salim Shah Suri
(r. 1545-1554), who in his turn was succeeded by his cousin Adil
Shah Suri (r.1554-1556); the latter’s forces under General Hemu, a
capable Hinduminister, were defeated by Humayun’s son, Akbar the
Great (r. 1556-1605), at the second battle of Panipat in 1556.
(Mansingh, pp. 396-97.)13. W. W. Hunter, The Indian Musalmans, and
some otherscholars give account of the movement up to 1871 only.14.
Actually, it was Captain Arthur Conolly (1807-1842), anarchetypal
Great Game player and later beheaded in Bokhara, who firstcoined
the phrase “the Great Game” in his letter to a friend, althoughit
was Rudyard Kipling (1865-1936), an English writer born in
Bombay,
-
PAKISTAN BUSINESS REVIEW JAN 2016
Research
821
The Indian Wahabi Movement (1826-1871) . . .
who immortalised it many years later in his novel, Kim, first
publishedin 1901. In the same year another Great Game novel, The
Half-Hearted,written by John Buchan, was also published. (Hopkirk,
pp. 1, 123,450.) Count K. [Karl Robert] V. Nesselrode (1780-1862),
Russiandiplomat, who gained the confidence of the emperor Tsar
AlexanderI (r. 1801-1825) and later became Foreign Minister to Tsar
Nicholas (r.1825-1855), named it “tournament of shadows” because
there was nodirect Anglo-Russian clash of arms. (Ibid., p. 5.)
Colonel AlgernonDurand (son of Lieutenant Henry Durand and brother
of ‘DurandLine’ famed Sir Mortimer Durand), the then Political
Officer Gilgit,termed it “the Game.” (Ibid., p. 451.) George (later
Lord, and Viceroy ofIndia from 1899 to 1905) Curzon called it “the
Central Asian Game.”(Ibid., p. 446.) Michael Edwardes, Playing the
Great Game: AVictorian Cold War, calls it “Cold War,” as subtitle
of his bookexplicitly indicates. (Edwardes, title page.)15. In the
Baltic town of Vilnius (present-day capital of Lithuaniastate),
there stands a simple monument bearing two plaques. Togetherthey
tell the whole story of French troops march to their doom in
thesummer of 1812. On the side with its back towards Moscow is
written:‘Napoleon Bonaparte passed this way in 1812 with 400,000
men’. Onthe other side are the words: ‘Napoleon Bonaparte passed
this way in1812 with 9,000 men’. (Hopkirk., p. 27.)16. The
literature on the subject is vast. Peter Hopkirk in hisbook, The
Great Game, lists 344 published works as “most useful.”(Ibid., p.
525-40.)17. Ibid., p. 5. This shrinkage was also a result of the
northwestexpansion of the British Indian Empire. The in-between,
200 mileslong, pincer-shaped narrow strip of terra firma, better
known asWakhan corridor (once part of the famous Silk Road – Marco
Polopassed through this area in the first half of the 1270s – now
cut offfrom the world) was also a political creation of the Great
Game, as itpurposefully came into being when the two great powers
found itexpedient to create it, through a series of treaties
between 1873 and1895, as a buffer zone, a sort of geographical
shock absorber,preventing Tsarist Russia from touching British
India. Actually, the
-
PAKISTAN BUSINESS REVIEW JAN 2016
Research
822
The Indian Wahabi Movement (1826-1871) . . .
British authorities prompted and paid Afghanistan to annex this
highaltitude, almost uninhabited area, with population of about
1000individuals of Kyrgyz ethnicity (perhaps the distant
descendants ofthe infamous ancient Kyrgyz, who roamed for centuries
all over CentralAsia for raiding Silk Road carawans, trapped in
this remote ‘corridorto nowhere’ but survived for almost 2000
years), but not a singleperson of Afghan, Pathan, Tajik or Uzbek
origin had ever lived in thistract since the complete desertion of
the ‘Silk Route’, perviouslybelonging to no one, stretching
eastwards from eastern Afghanistanas far as the Chinese frontiers,
wedged in between Tajikistan (thenunder the Russian control) to the
north and South Asia’s Gilgit Agencyand the principality of Chitral
(then under the British control) to thesouth, with a view to pevent
British India and Tsarist Russia fromsharing a border.18. “Some
would argue that the Great Game has never reallyceased, and that it
was merely the forerunner of” the new phase ofGreat Game, better
known as “the Cold War [1945-1989] of our owntimes, fuelled by the
same fears, suspicions and misunderstandings.”(Hopkirk, pp. 7-8.)
The period from 1917, the year which witnessed thesuccess of the
Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, to 1944, which saw theend of the
Second World War, may be deemed as a prelude to the ColdWar, which
was declared ended in December 1989 at the Malta summitmeeting
between the heads of the United States and the then SovietUnion.
But with sudden and dramatic dissolution of the Soviet Union,in the
very next year (1990), there sprang up almost overnight
fiveentirely new countries, eight if the Caucasus region is
included, withfabulous oil and gas reserves, rich hoards of gold,
silver, copper, zinc,lead and iron ore, besides crucial pipe-line
routes, in Central Asia,giving birth to what is termed by Peter
Hopkirk, the ‘new Great Game’.According to Hopkirk, “Besides the
Americans and Russians, otherregional powers, notably China, India
and Pakistan” are the “powerfulplayers in the ‘new Great game’.”
Both, the United States and Russia,the prominent players, are
“anxious to keep Central Asia in a peacefuland cooperative state in
order to preserve their access to its rich gasand oil supplies.”
So, “the collapse of Russian rule in Central Asia has
-
PAKISTAN BUSINESS REVIEW JAN 2016
Research
823
The Indian Wahabi Movement (1826-1871) . . .
tossed the area back into the melting pot of history. Almost
anythingcould happen there now and only a brave or foolish man
would predictits future.” (Hopkirk, pp. xiii-xvii.)19. The war
“cost the British in India fifteen million poundssterling and
20,000 lives in four years of military disasters.” (Mansingh,p.
38.) 20. According to renowned British strategist Sir
HenryCreswicke Rawlinson (Director of the East India Company
1856,Member British Parliament 1858 and 1865-68, Member of the
Councilof India 1858-59 and held the latter’s lifetime membership
from 1868 to1895), “If the Czar’s officers acquire a foothold in
Kabul the disquietingeffect will be prodigious. Every native ruler
throughout northern Indiawho either has, or fancies he has,
grievance, or is even cramped orincommoded by our orderly
Government, will begin intriguing withthe Russians; worse,
Afghanistan possesses a machinery of agitationsingularly adapted
for acting on the seething, fermenting, festering,mass of Muslim
hostility in India.” (Rawlinson, pp. 279-80, quoted inSarila, p.
17.)21. W.W. Hunter has this to say further on the matter:
“Duringthe past seven years [since 1864], one traitor after another
has beenconvicted and transported for life. Indeed each of the
fanatic wars onour Frontier has produced its corresponding State
Trial within ourterritory. At this moment [in 1871] a large body of
prisoners, drawnfrom widely distant Districts, are suffering for
their common crimes orwaiting for trials.” And he concludes, “the
whole Press of BritishIndia has been discussing the probabilities
of another Afghan War;and should any such trial be in store for us,
it will be no small dangeraverted if the Wahabi conspiracy within
our territory can be firststamped out.” (Hunter, pp. 75, 97,
99.)22. “The British then launched a number of prosecutions
againstthe leaders, workers and supporters of the Movement. The
policewas successful in unearthing a good deal of information and
noimportant worker was left without being brought to face a trial;
someaccused turned crown witnesses; where sufficient evidence was
notavailable to ensure a conviction, it is alleged, it was
fabricated. . . .
-
PAKISTAN BUSINESS REVIEW JAN 2016
Research
824
The Indian Wahabi Movement (1826-1871) . . .
The sentences were generally severe; long terms of imprisonment
ortransportation to the Andamans were awarded to many; the
propertiesof the main leaders were confiscated and sold at
ridiculous prices.The entire complex of buildings at Sadiqpur was
razed to the ground.”(Qureshi, p. 172.)23. In 1878, during the
Second Anglo-Afghan War, a specialofficer was appointed for the
Khyber. Kurram became an agency in1892, while the three remaining
agencies of Malakand, Tochi, andWana were created between 1895 and
1896. (Channa, p. 45.)
ReferencesBenedict, Gerald. The Watkins Dictionary of Religions
and Secular
Faiths (London: Watkins Publishing, 2008).Bowker, John (ed.).
The Concise Oxford Dictionery of World Religions
(Oxford: University Press, 2005).Caroe, Sir Olaf. The Pathans:
500 B.C.-A.D. 1957 (10th imp.; Karachi:
Oxford University Press, 1999).Channa, Sahib Khan. “The Movement
for Separation of Sindh from
the Bombay Presidency, 1847-1936,” Ph. D. thesispresented to the
University of Sindh in 1983 (MS).
Edwardes, Micheal. Playing the Great Game: A Victorian GreatGame
(London, 1975).
Hopkirk, Peter. The Great Game (London: John Murray,
2006).Hunter, W. W. The Indian Musalmans (first pub. in 1871; 2nd
imp.;
New Delhi: Rupa & Co., 2004).Isaacs, Dr. Alan et al (eds.).
Oxford Dictionary of World History
(Oxford: University Press, reprint 2001).Jaspers, Karl. The
Origin and Goal of History (London: Routledge,
1953).Mansingh, Surjit. Historical Dictionary of India (6th ed.;
New
Delhi: Vision Books Pvt. Ltd., reprint 2005).Meyer, Karl and
Brysac, Shareen. Tournament of Shadows (New
York: Counterpoint Press, 1999).Nichols, Robert. Setting the
Frontier: Land, Law and Society in
the Peshawar Valley (Karachi, Oxford University Press,2001).
-
PAKISTAN BUSINESS REVIEW JAN 2016
Research
825
The Indian Wahabi Movement (1826-1871) . . .
Qureshi, I. H. Ulema in Politics from 1556 to 1947 (2nd ed.,
n.p.[Karachi], n.d. [1974]).
Rawlinson, Sir Henry Creswicke. England and Russia (London:John
Murray, 1975).
Sarila, Narendra Singh. The Shadow of the Great Game: TheUntold
Story of India’s Partition (3rd imp.; New Delhi:HarperCollins
Publishers, 2006).
Smith, Vincent A. The Oxford History of India, ed. Percival
Spear (3rd
imp.; Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1983).Watson, Peter.
Ideas: A History from Fire to Freud (London: Orion
Books Ltd., 2006).Wilson, General Sir Robert. A Sketch of the
Military and Political
Power of Russia in the Year 1817 (first published in 1817).